New York City Should Fight the Central Park Jogger Lawsuit

Central Park is a gem, a green oasis in the center of Manhattan. One evening in April 1989, a young female jogger was brutally beaten nearly to death and raped in the park. The police made arrests; defendants confessed; the district attorney prosecuted. After a lengthy hearing, a judge found that the confessions were made voluntarily and were useable at trial. Jurors learned that DNA found on the victim did not match DNA taken from any defendant, but still convicted the defendants.

If defendants are mistakenly convicted when police and prosecutors acted in good faith, the city should not pay for a mistaken result.

Twelve years later, a convicted murderer and serial rapist asserted that he, acting alone, perpetrated this heinous crime. The district attorney investigated, learned that this prisoner’s DNA matched DNA taken from the victim, and moved to vacate the sentences, which the court did. Then, the defendants and their families sued the city for $250 million, and the gist of a new Ken Burns film is that the city should give the defendants the money.

I disagree.

I know that the district attorney concluded that "there is a probability that the new evidence ... would have resulted in verdicts more favorable to the defendants." But whatever doubts he had about the case, I know he never declared the defendants to be innocent. I know that he did not find that the prosecutors and police officers involved in the original investigation had acted improperly, and that they deny engaging in misconduct.

If the city’s police deliberately and wrongfully harm individuals by violating their rights, the city must accept responsibility and pay damages. But if defendants who were not involved in a crime are mistakenly convicted by a jury as a result of the efforts of police and prosecutors who were acting in good faith, the city should not pay for a mistaken result. When Robert M. Morgenthau, the former district attorney, had a doubt about the convictions, he took action. But, contrary to the view that, unfortunately, is becoming a norm in our society, not every bad thing that happens makes someone entitled to recompense by the government. Absent proof of intentional wrongdoing by the city’s agents, the city should not pay.